Comment

powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

I find it interesting how reliable of a tell it is that someone has just given up on any sort of real argument when they start deploying rhetorics like “boring” or the like. Very similar to “It’s 2025!” or “I’m just tired y’all”.

Scientific truth doesn’t care how boring you find it. That is the current scientific consensus, regardless of your opinion on it. Just like 1+1=2 doesn’t care if you hate it with a passion. It’s still true, and will continue to be so after you realize your error.

Take your pick of other relevent scientists to believe if you want, though I have my doubts about Dawkins being “anti trans”. This thread is an exemplar of how badly people want to conflate being pro-science with being anti-trans, for very silly reasons.

source

Sort:hotnew top

zalgotext@sh.itjust.works ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
It doesn’t matter what arguments I give you, you’re dug in. That’s what’s boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired “my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong” response. “Arguments” like that are boring. 🤷

source
- powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  You’re welcome to spice things up with any sort of support for your argument. It is kind of boring to keep repeating “No, let’s not reject science” I’ll admit, but you’re certainly not providing anything of value.
  
  I’ll help you out. Here’s a link someone else provided (ironically supporting my point exactly):
  
  medium.com/…/letter-to-the-us-president-and-congr…
  
  Anisogamy is the definition of sex
  
  and
  
  In animals and plants, binary sex is universally defined by gamete type, even though sexes vary in how they are developmentally determined and phenotypically identified across taxa.
  
  and
  
  the Tri-societies were wrong to speak in our names and claim that there is a scientific consensus without even conducting a survey of society members to see if such a consensus exists. Distorting reality to comply with ideology and using a misleading claim of consensus to give a veneer of scientific authority to your statement does more harm than just misrepresenting our views: it also weakens public trust in science, which has declined rapidly in the last few years.
  
  Real biology right there. From real biologists. You’re not arguing with me, you’re arguing with the scientific consensus as now explained to you directly from said consensus. Reality doesn’t care about whether or not it bores you. It’s true regardless.
  
  source
  - zalgotext@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago
    Are you serious? Like, you can’t be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We’ve already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱
    
    source